Facts

Parties:

  • Appellants: [A.] , [B.] , [C.] , [D.]
  • Respondent: Public Prosecutor's Office of Basel-Landschaft, represented by Prosecutor [E.]

Court: Federal Supreme Court, II. Criminal Law Division

Date of Judgment: February 12, 2024

Subject Matter: Criminal proceedings for suspected qualified offenses under the Narcotics Act; motion for recusal against Prosecutor [E.]

Facts:

  • The appellants filed motions for recusal against Prosecutor [E.] , which were dismissed by the Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft.
  • The Federal Supreme Court partially upheld the appeals against the dismissal of the motions for recusal and remanded the case to the lower court.
  • The Cantonal Court again dismissed the motions for recusal, prompting the appellants to file another appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.

Considerations

The challenged decisions are closely related in content, which is why the proceedings were combined and dealt with in a single decision. The appeal in criminal matters is generally admissible under Art. 78 FSCA. FSCA, and the further conditions for admission are met. New facts and evidence that arose only after the challenged decision are inadmissible.

The grounds for recusal of criminal authorities are regulated in Art. 56 CrimPC. A ground for recusal exists if circumstances exist that, when viewed objectively, are suitable for arousing mistrust in the impartiality of the prosecutor. Incorrect procedural actions do not in themselves constitute a ground for recusal, unless there are particularly serious or unusually frequent errors that represent a serious breach of official duties.

The Federal Supreme Court has already examined the motions for recusal of the appellants with judgments of December 22, 2020, and remanded the case to the lower court. However, the…